MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6992019766

Islamic feminist community organizing for combatting violence against women : a case study of Rifka Annisa, Women Crisis Center, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

2005· dissertation· en· W6992019766 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsIslamIndonesianContext (archaeology)PoliticsPerspective (graphical)Work (physics)Community organizingThematic analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis focuses on an Islamic feminist community organization, and its activities in combating violence against women. The case example discussed in this study is the Rifka Annisa Women's Crisis Center (WCC Rifka Annisa) located in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. By examining the environment and the issues that WCC Rifka Annisa faces, broader thematic concerns can be applied to Indonesian society in general. This study reviews western feminist and community organizing approaches, and examines them in light of the specific religious, cultural, economic and political context in Indonesia. A blend of Islamic feminim and community organizing approaches has emerged in Indonesia. Data collection for this study was based on interviews and direct observations. Exploring this perspective will contribute to the knowledge, practice and values of social work generally, and development work in similar contexts in particular.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicAsian Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207